Australian Censorship News: March 2007

UPDATES 31st March 2007
SPOTLIGHT: RC Again!
PRIVATE MAN #12: RC
BUTTHOLE WHORES: RC 
100% Home GIRLS #45: Modified.

UPDATES 24th March 2007
CHEEK FREAKS: RC
CUM DRINK MY VINTAGE WINE: Cut 
WA PERTH SWINGER CLUB #57 RC.
Classification Amendment Bill 2006. 

UPDATES 18th March 2007
LE KINK: RC.
LORNA GOES WILD: Cut.
Warrnambool Adult Store.
X18+ in NSW.
New Censorship Bill Revised.
Internet Filers Delayed.
Phillip Adams on Censorship.
GETTING UP: The download.
NZ vs. Aus Censorship.
PICTURE PREMIUM #104: Modified.
NOTES ON A SCANDAL: RB Report.
300: RB Report. 

UPDATES 6th March 2007
VIVA EROTICA in Court.
300: MA15+ by RB.
THE HANGING: RC Reasons.
LAID UP: X18+ Cut.
Des Clark on the Future.
New Censorship Bill. 

UPDATES
31st March 2007

SPOTLIGHT: RC Again!

Between January and May 2006, Siren Visual Entertainment had four hentai DVDs banned by the Classification Board. The titles were DARLING, HOOLIGAN, SPOTLIGHT, and MY BROTHER'S WIFE.

In February, after censoring some of the problematic content, Siren managed to get an R18+ rating for MY BROTHER'S WIFE. Their attempt to do the same with SPOTLIGHT has not gone so quite so smoothly. The censored version has again been hit with an RC rating.

SPOTLIGHT Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 10 May 2006 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher SHIYUUTA BIWAJIMA, CHIKARA NIKI
Production Company BLUE GALE 
Country of Origin JAPAN 
Applicant SIREN VISUAL ENTERTAINMENT 
File Number T06/1778 
Classification Number 4150742B

SPOTLIGHT Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice Category 
Film - Sale/Hire
 Version REVISED 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 21 March 2007 
Author HIJIRI ITOU 
Publisher SHIYUUTA BIWAJIMA, CHIKARA NIKI, SHAWNE KLEKNER, NORKO AI 
Production Company CRITICAL MASS 
Country of Origin JAPAN 
Applicant SIREN VISUAL ENTERTAINMENT 
File Number T06/1778 
Classification Number 5250452E

******

PRIVATE MAN #12: RC
BUTTHOLE WHORES: RC 

What would an update of this site be without some more banned hardcore. Calvista were once again the victims of the Classification Board. We are only three months into 2007 and already they have chalked up ten banned titles.

First up we have episode 12 in the gay PRIVATE MAN series.

HERE CUMS THE BRIDEGROOM (said to be HERE COMES THE BRIDEGROOM (PRIVATE MAN 12)) Film (DVD)
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 27 March 2007 
Author TOM BRADFORD 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company FRASERSIDE HOLDINGS LTD 
Country of Origin EUROPE 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/1417 
Classification Number 4253041F

The second RC was yet another Belladonna title.

BELLADONNA'S BUTTHOLE WHORES (said to be BUTTHOLE WHORES) Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire Version 
ORIGINAL Duration variable 
Date of Classification 29 March 2007 
Author BELLADONNA 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company EVIL EMPIRE 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/1443 
Classification Number 5253141E

Belladonna has caused quite a few problems at the Classification Board. The past few years have seen them ban the following titles.

There have also been a number of her DVDs passed as X18+, with the Classification Board listing them as Original versions. This only means that they were passed first time. It does not show any pre-cutting that Calvista may have done before submission. I'd suspect that Belladonna's reputation would have seen at least some of these pre-cut by Calvista to avoid being Refused Classification. The following titles have been rated X18+, and are listed as Original versions. Proceed with caution if you are picking up the local release.

******

100% Home GIRLS #45: Modified.

The Unrestricted issue #45 of THE PICTURE 100% HOME GIRLS magazine has been modified in order to gain an Unrestricted rating. The proof print was originally rated Category 1 on March 23rd. 

THE PICTURE 100% HOME GIRLS NO 45 (SAID TO BE UNRESTRICTED) 
Publication (Magazine) 
Classification Category 1 Restricted 
Consumer Advice 
Category Publication 
Version PROOF PRINT 
Duration 106 page(s) 
Date of Classification 23 March 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher ACP EXTRA 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin AUSTRALIA 
Applicant ACP EXTRA - PICTURE PREMIUM 
File Number L07/43 
Classification Number 5353141C

THE PICTURE 100% HOME GIRLS NO 45 (SAID TO BE UNRESTRICTED) 
Publication (Magazine) 
Classification Unrestricted 
Consumer Advice M - not recommended for readers under 15 years. 
Category Publication 
Version MODIFIED PROOF PRINT 
Duration 106 page(s) 
Date of Classification 27 March 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher ACP EXTRA 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin AUSTRALIA 
Applicant ACP EXTRA - PICTURE PREMIUM 
File Number L07/43 
Classification Number 47535624

UPDATES
24th March 2007

CHEEK FREAKS: RC
CUM DRINK MY VINTAGE WINE: Cut 

More banned hardcore to report. CHEEK FREAKS was Refused Classification on Thursday. 

CHEEK FREAKS Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 22 March 2007 
Author BRIAN XIN 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company PULSE 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/1334 
Classification Number 625A4614

Another previously banned title has been passed after cuts. Calvista censored the DVD of CUM DRINK MY VINTAGE WINE and have been awarded an X18+ (Explicit Sex). 

CUM DRINK MY VINTAGE WINE (Said to be CUM TASTE THE WINE) Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 22 February 2007 
Author RICASSO Publisher 
NOT SHOWN 
Production Company 
COLOSSAL Country of Origin 
NOT SHOWN Applicant 
CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/821 
Classification Number 5073243E

CUM DRINK MY VINTAGE WINE Film (DVD)
Classification X 18+ (Restricted to 18 and over.) 
Consumer Advice Explicit sex 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version REVISED 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 22 March 2007 
Author RICASSO 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company COLOSSAL 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/821 
Classification Number 72584637

***

WA PERTH SWINGER CLUB #57 RC.

Issue # 57 of the WA PERTH SWINGER CLUB magazine has also been hit with an RC rating.

WA PERTH SWINGER CLUB NO 57 ? 2007 
Publication (Magazine) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Publication 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration 84 page(s) 
Date of Classification 14 March 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher GOSWINGER.NET 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin AUSTRALIA 
Applicant ASP PRODUCTIONS P/L 
File Number L07/34 
Classification Number 72595636

******

Classification Amendment Bill 2006.

The CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT BILL 2006 has now moved from the Senate to the House of Representatives.

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT BILL 2006: Second Reading
Date 01 March, 2007 
Database Senate Hansard
Page 45 
Proof Yes
Source Senate 
Stage Second Reading
Type Procedural text 
Context Bills

Second Reading Debate resumed from 8 February, on motion by Senator Ian Campbell:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

***

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT BILL 2006: Third Reading
Date 01 March, 2007 
Database Senate Hansard
Page 45 
Proof Yes
Source Senate 
Stage Third Reading
Type Procedural text 
Context Bills

Third Reading Bill passed through its remaining stages without amendment or debate.

***

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT BILL 2006: Returned from the Senate

Date 01 March, 2007 
Database House Hansard
Page 68 
Proof Yes
Source House 
Stage Returned from the Senate
Type Procedural text 
Context Bills
Main Committee No

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT BILL 2006  

Returned from the Senate Message received from the Senate returning the bills without amendment or request.

***

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Bill 2007
EM type 
EM Bill number 07042
Date 22 March, 2007 
Database Explanatory memoranda
Source House

2004-2005-2006-2007

THE PARLIAMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT (ADVERTISING AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2007

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

(Circulated by authority of the Attorney-General, the Honourable Philip Ruddock MP)

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT (ADVERTISING AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2007

OUTLINE

This Bill enables an advertising assessment scheme and a television series assessment scheme to be established under the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (Classification Act). Each scheme will be contained in a Commonwealth legislative instrument.

Schedule 1 of this Bill is part of a package of reforms which, together with amendments to State and Territory legislation and to legislative instruments under the Classification Act, will remove the prohibition on advertising unclassified films and computer games. The increasing risk of piracy means products are often available for classification only very close to their release date. The current prohibition, with limited exceptions only for public exhibition films, places unnecessary regulatory limitations on marketing of classifiable products. This Bill establishes an industry based self-assessment scheme whereby the likely classification of an unclassified film or computer game is assessed by an authorised industry assessor for the purpose of advertising that film or computer game before it is classified. Safeguards are included in the scheme to ensure consumers continue to be protected from inappropriate material.

Schedule 2 of this Bill amends the classification requirements for films that are compilations of episodes of a television series that has been broadcast in Australia. This Bill establishes an industry based self-assessment scheme whereby an application for classification of a film that is episodes of a television series may be accompanied by a report from an authorised assessor. There is an increasing number of television series being released on Video and DVD. Current arrangements for classification of such films are both expensive and time consuming. The aim of this Bill is to streamline the classification process and to respond to the changing technological environment for entertainment media. The purpose of the proposal is to reduce the cost to industry and the processing time for the Classification Board. Quality assurance processes are included in the scheme to ensure the on-going integrity of the classification process.

FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT The Bill will not result in any change to the net asset position for the Commonwealth. It is not expected that there will be any significant financial impact of the industry assessor advertising scheme. The television series assessment scheme is intended to result in cost reductions to industry. NOTES ON NEW SECTIONS

New section 1: Short title New section 1 specifies that the short title will be – Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Act 2007. New section 2: Commencement Sections 1 to 3 of the Bill will commence on Royal Assent. Schedule 1 of the Bill will commence on the earlier of Proclamation or 12 months after Royal Assent. The 12 month period is necessary to enable complementary State and Territory legislation to be enacted. Schedule 2 of the Bill will commence on the earlier of Proclamation or 6 months after Royal Assent. This allows training and application processes to be established. New section 3: Schedule This new section provides that the amendments made by the Bill, when enacted, are as set out in the Schedules. SCHEDULE 1 – Amendments relating to advertising Classification (Publications, Film and Computer Games) Act 1995 Items 1 and 2 - Section 5 ‘Advertisement’ These new provisions update the definition of ‘advertisement’ to explicitly include advertising on the internet and exclude product merchandising including on clothing. This change will apply to all advertising covered by the Act, (that is advertising for classified and unclassified films, publications and computer games). The National Classification Scheme is already considered to apply to internet advertising of classifiable material. These amendments clarify this. As the intention of the Scheme is to ensure consumers have adequate information to make informed entertainment choices for themselves and their families, the exclusion of product merchandising such as caps, toys, drink bottles and similar products carrying logos or characters derived from films or computer games recognises that merchandising is not a primary source of classification information for consumers. 3. Section 5 ‘Decision’ This item amends the definition of ‘decision’ so that a decision of the Classification Board on the likely classification of an unclassified film or computer game is reviewable by the Classification Review Board. The provision ensures the new assessment decisions by the Classification Board will be subject to merits review by the Classification Review Board. 4. Paragraph 5B(3)(b) ‘Exempt Film or Computer Game’ This paragraph makes a consequential amendment to the definition of an exempt film or computer game to reflect the change in policy that unclassified films and computer games can be advertised where it is done in accordance with the conditions to be set out in a new Instrument. The effect of the amendment is that a film or computer game is not exempt from classification if it contains an advertisement for an unclassified film or computer game that has not been assessed, or has been assessed as likely to be classified M or higher. 5. Subsection 22(1) Commensurate Audience Provisions This item makes a consequential amendment to reflect the change in policy that unclassified films and computer games can be advertised where it is done in accordance with the conditions set out in a new Instrument. New paragraphs 22(1)(a) and (c) reflect the existing provisions, re-ordered. The effect of the new paragraph 22(1)(b) is that a film or computer game must not be classified is it contains an advertisement for an unclassified film or computer game unless the film or computer game has been assessed either by an authorised assessor or by the Classification Board and the assessment is that the unclassified film or computer game is likely to have the same or lower classification. The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that when advertising unclassified films and computer games together with classified films or computer games (for example trailers on DVDs and trailers or demos on computer games), the classified film or computer game has a classification that is the same, or higher, classification as the likely classification of the advertised film or computer game. 6. Part 3 (heading) This item removes the current heading ‘Approval of Advertisements’ as it is inaccurate and replaces it with ‘Advertising’. 7. Subsections 29(6) and (7) This item makes a consequential amendment to reflect the change in policy that unclassified films and computer games can be advertised where it is done in accordance with conditions to be set out in a new Instrument. The new subsection prevents the Classification Board from approving an advertisement for a film or computer game that is – or is likely to be - classified RC (Refused Classification). 8. Subsection 30(1)(b) This item makes a makes a consequential amendment to reflect the change in policy that unclassified films and computer games can be advertised and to achieve consistency in the application of the Classification Act to films and computer games. 9. Division 2 of Part 3 (Advertising of unclassified films and unclassified computer games) The new Part 3, Division 2 amendments remove the existing advertising exemption scheme that applies to public exhibition films. Instead the new Part provides for the creation of a new advertising scheme for unclassified films and computer games. These new provisions do not apply to publications. Subdivision A – Scheme relating to advertising New subsection 31(1) enables the Attorney-General to make a legislative instrument that determines the conditions for advertising unclassified films and computer games. The new section is broad in scope in order to empower the Attorney -General to create a scheme similar to that in place for additional content. Including the scheme in a legislative instrument ensures that the scheme is able to respond quickly and flexibly to developments in marketing approaches should this be required. New subsection 31(2) enables the instrument to place conditions on advertising unclassified films and computer games, including conditions about: The display of a message about classification. (A new message advising consumers to ‘Check the Classification’ is proposed to be included in the instrument.) Limitations on advertising unclassified films or computer games together with classified material, so that the instrument may contain a ‘commensurate audience rule’. Time periods for industry to include classification information on advertisements after classification. Ensuring adequate safeguards against continued advertising of unclassified material by persons who have not complied with the scheme. New paragraphs 31(3)(a) and (b) provide that a person appropriately trained and authorised by the Director is able to make an assessment of the likely classification of a film or computer game for the purpose of advertising that film or computer game before it has been classified. New paragraph 31(3)(c) sets out the matters that must be considered when making an assessment of the likely classification. New paragraph 31(3)(d) enables the Director to impose barring notices on assessors and applicants for unacceptable use of the assessment scheme. New paragraph 31(3)(e) sets out that the consequences for an Assessor of receiving a barring notice can include losing the authority to provide assessments. New paragraph 31(3)(f) empowers the instrument to provide a right of review to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. New paragraphs 31(3)(g) and (h) ensure power exists for the Classification Board and the Director to exercise ancillary administrative functions for the proper operation of the scheme. New subsection 31(4) is an important safeguard enabling the Instrument to ensure that the scheme does not permit inappropriate advertising of unclassified films and computer games. New subsection 31(5) ensures that the instrument determining the scheme will be made after consultation with Censorship Ministers, protecting the co-operative nature of the National Classification Scheme. New section 31(6) makes it clear that the advertising scheme does not apply to material that is likely to be classified X18+ or RC. Advertising this material will continue to be prohibited. Subdivision B—Assessments of likely classifications of unclassified films and unclassified computer games New subsection 32(1) enables a person to apply to the Board for an assessment of the likely classification of a film or computer game for the purposes of advertising that film or computer game before classification. It is envisaged that applicants would use this provision for an assessment in difficult cases, or where they want the assurance of the Board’s consideration, or where it is not feasible or cost effective to obtain an assessment from an authorised assessor. New subsection 32(2) sets out the formal requirements that must be met in making an application for an assessment of the likely classification of a film or computer game. New section 33 sets out the circumstances in which the Board may assess the likely classification of a film or computer game and the circumstances in which the Board may decline to assess the likely classification. New subsection 33(6) clarifies the instrument is not a legislative instrument within the meaning of section 5 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003. New section 34 enables an assessment to be revoked in certain circumstances and sets out when that revocation will take effect. New section 35 provides that an applicant is entitled to a written notice of a decision of the Classification Board under new sections 33 and 34 within 30 ordinary days from the day on which the decision was made. This is consistent with the other requirements in the Act for the Board to provide notice of its decisions. 10. Paragraph 42(1)(b) The amendment to this paragraph includes applicants for an assessment of likely classification for advertising purposes as people who may seek merits review of a decision by the Classification Board. 11. Subsection 87A(1)(b) This new paragraph applies the 20 business day timeframe (within which the Classification Board must a decision on an application for classification or approval of an advertisement) to include applications for an assessment of the likely classification of a film or computer game under the new section 33. 12. Paragraph 97(c) This section sets out superseded transitional arrangements for applications for a certificate of exemption under State and Territory laws. It therefore repealed Item 13 of the Schedule which deals with the transitional arrangements for certificates of exemption under the current provisions. 13. Transitional regulations This item empowers the Governor-General to make regulations dealing with the transitional arrangements that will apply to films that have a certificate of exemption for advertising purposes at the time these amendments come into force. SCHEDULE 2 – Amendments relating to films of television series Classification (Publications, Film and Computer Games) Act 1995 Schedule 2 amendments enable an authorised assessment scheme to be established in a legislative instrument whereby a person appropriately trained and authorised by the Director is able to make recommendations to the Board about the classification of films that comprise episodes of a television series that have been broadcast in Australia. The Board will retain responsibility for classifying the film. If an applicant wishes, the Board’s consideration may be assisted by the assessment of an authorised assessor. 1. Section 5 ‘Authorised television series assessor’ This item inserts a new definition that is relevant to the television series assessment scheme. It makes it clear that an ‘authorised television series assessor’ is a person authorised under section 14B(3) to prepare assessments of unclassified films that comprise episodes of a television series that have been broadcast in Australia. . 2. Before section 15 – Insert section 14B A key characteristic of a television series is that it is targeted to a particular consumer group and therefore generally has consistency in the impact of its content. The effect of the definition of ‘film’ under the Classification Act is that when a collection of episodes of a television series is put onto DVD it is considered in the same way as a feature film and viewed by the Classification Board to determine its classification. The fee for classification is calculated by reference to the total running time of the film. A compilation of episodes of a television series may include many hours of running time. This means classification of television series is comparatively expensive for Australian industry. There is an increasing number of television series being released on Video and DVD. The current arrangements for classification of such films are both expensive and time consuming. To address this issue a new section is inserted into the Classification Act. New subsection 14B(1) enables a person to submit an authorised assessment together with an application for classification of a film that comprises episodes of a television series that has been broadcast in Australia. New subsection 14B(2) sets out the formal requirements of an assessment. New subsection 14B(3) enables the Attorney-General to make a legislative instrument that determines a scheme for the classification of films that are episodes of a television series. New subsection 14B(4) sets out the scope of the Instrument. The new section is broad in scope in order to empower the Attorney -General to create a scheme similar to that in place for additional content. Including the details of the scheme in a legislative instrument allows flexibility to adjust it to respond to technological advances. Subsection 14B(4) ensures the Instrument can provide for: The requirements for making an assessment The matters to be considered in an assessment The requirements for continued authorisation and the circumstances in which such authorisation may be revoked The sanctions that may be applied to applicants who abuse the scheme including issuing ‘barring notices’ The right of external appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for decisions made under the Scheme Proper function and power for the Classification Board and the Director to exercise ancillary administrative functions for the proper operation of the scheme, and The circumstances that may lead to an assessment being determined to be ‘misleading, incorrect or grossly inadequate’ under new section 21AB. New subsection 14B(5) ensures that the instrument determining the scheme will be made after consultation with Censorship Ministers, protecting the co-operative nature of the National Classification Scheme. The new subsection 14B(6) clarifies that references to episodes having been broadcast in Australia, in new subsection 14B(1). Are to services as defined in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. 3. Before section 22 – Insert section 21AB New section 21AB provides that the Board must revoke the classification of a television series compilation in specified circumstances which demonstrate that the assessment on which the classification was based was highly unreliable. This is an important safeguard to ensure the integrity of the television series assessment scheme and to maintain consumer confidence in the National Classification Scheme. It covers situations where the Board has made a classification on the basis of an assessment that did not contain information about classifiable elements (as defined) or, if it did contain such information, the assessment of those elements was highly unreliable because it was misleading, incorrect or grossly inadequate. The Board is required to revoke the classification if it would have made a different classification decision had it been aware of those matters. An everyday interpretation should be made to determine whether an assessment of the classifiable elements could be regarded as misleading, incorrect or grossly inadequate. For flexibility, the instrument may prescribe circumstances in which such an assessment is taken to be misleading, incorrect or grossly inadequate.

***

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Bill 2007
Stage First Reading 
Private No
Name Attorney-General portfolio 
Bill number 07042
Date 22 March, 2007 
Database Bills
Source House

2004-2005-2006-2007

The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Presented and read a first time

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Bill 2007

No. , 2007

(Attorney-General)

A Bill for an Act to amend the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, and for related purposes

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Bill 2007 No. , 2007

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Bill 2007 No. , 2007 Contents 
1 Short title 1 
2 Commencement 1 
3 Schedule(s) 2 Schedule 1—Amendments relating to advertising 3 Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 3 Schedule 2—Amendments relating to films of television series 10 Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 10

Schedule 2 Amendments relating to films of television series

Amendments relating to films of television series Schedule 2

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Bill 2007 No. , 2007

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Bill 2007 No. , 2007

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Bill 2007 No. , 2007 A Bill for an Act to amend the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, and for related purposes The Parliament of Australia enacts: 1 Short title This Act may be cited as the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Act 2007. 2 Commencement (1) Each provision of this Act specified in column 1 of the table commences, or is taken to have commenced, in accordance with column 2 of the table. Any other statement in column 2 has effect according to its terms.

Commencement information

Column 1 
Column 2 
Column 3

Provision(s) Commencement Date/Details

1. Sections 1 to 3 and anything in this Act not elsewhere covered by this table The day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent.

2. Schedule 1 A single day to be fixed by Proclamation. However, if any of the provision(s) do not commence within the period of 12 months beginning on the day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent, they commence on the first day after the end of that period.

3. Schedule 2 A single day to be fixed by Proclamation. However, if any of the provision(s) do not commence within the period of 6 months beginning on the day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent, they commence on the first day after the end of that period.

Note: This table relates only to the provisions of this Act as originally passed by both Houses of the Parliament and assented to. It will not be expanded to deal with provisions inserted in this Act after assent. (2) Column 3 of the table contains additional information that is not part of this Act. Information in this column may be added to or edited in any published version of this Act. 3 Schedule(s) Each Act that is specified in a Schedule to this Act is amended or repealed as set out in the applicable items in the Schedule concerned, and any other item in a Schedule to this Act has effect according to its terms.

Schedule 1—Amendments relating to advertising

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 1 Section 5 (paragraph (c) of the definition of advertisement) Repeal the paragraph, substitute: (c) advertising on the Internet; 2 Section 5 (at the end of the definition of advertisement) Add: ; or (g) advertising by means of a product: (i) that refers to or is derived from the publication, film or computer game; and (ii) that is primarily intended to be sold or distributed to the general public or to a section of the general public; and (iii) that a reasonable person would not consider to be a primary source of classification information for consumers about the publication, film or computer game. 3 Section 5 (paragraph (d) of the definition of decision) Repeal the paragraph, substitute: (d) to assess or refuse to assess the likely classification of an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game; or (da) to revoke an assessment of the likely classification of an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game; or 4 Paragraph 5B(3)(b) Repeal the paragraph, substitute: (b) an advertisement for an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game: (i) that has been assessed in accordance with section 31 or under section 33 as being likely to be classified M or a higher classification; or (ii) the likely classification of which has not been assessed in accordance with section 31 or under section 33; or 5 Subsection 22(1) Repeal the subsection, substitute: (1) An unclassified film (the first film) or unclassified computer game (the first game) must not be classified if it contains an advertisement: (a) for a film or computer game with a higher classification than the classification the first film or first game would be given if it did not contain the advertisement; or (b) for an unclassified film or unclassified computer game: (i) that has been assessed in accordance with section 31 or under section 33 as being likely to have a higher classification than the classification the first film or first game would be given if it did not contain the advertisement; or (ii) the likely classification of which has not been assessed in accordance with section 31 or under section 33; or (c) that has been refused approval. 6 Part 3 (heading) Repeal the heading, substitute: Part 3—Advertising 7 Subsections 29(6) and (7) Repeal the subsections, substitute: (6) The Board must refuse to approve an advertisement for: (a) a film or computer game that has been classified RC; or (b) an unclassified film or unclassified computer game that, if classified, would be likely to be classified RC. 8 Subsection 30(1)(b) Omit “classified”. 9 Division 2 of Part 3 Repeal the Division, substitute: Division 2—Advertising of unclassified films and unclassified computer games Subdivision A—Scheme relating to advertising 31 Scheme for advertising may be determined by legislative instrument (1) The Minister may, by legislative instrument, determine a scheme for the advertising of unclassified films and unclassified computer games including, but not limited to, the following: (a) specifying conditions on which unclassified films and unclassified computer games may be advertised; (b) providing for requirements relating to self-assessment by industry of the likely classification of unclassified films and unclassified computer games. (2) The conditions on which unclassified films and unclassified computer games may be advertised include, but are not limited to, conditions in relation to the following: (a) messages that must be displayed on or in relation to the advertising of an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game; (b) the circumstances in which an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game may be advertised with a classified film or game (including circumstances relating to the likely classification of the film or computer game); (c) the time within which messages on or in relation to an advertisement for an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game must be changed after the film or computer game is classified; (d) a condition that an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game may not be advertised by a person in respect of whom a barring notice of a kind mentioned in paragraph (3)(d) is in force. (3) Without limiting subsection (1), the scheme may: (a) provide for the authorisation of persons to make assessments of the likely classifications of unclassified films or unclassified computer games; and (b) specify the requirements for authorisation of a kind mentioned in paragraph (a), and for continued authorisation (including the circumstances in which such authorisation may be revoked or suspended); and (c) specify the basis on which an authorised person may make, amend or revoke assessments of the likely classification of unclassified films or unclassified computer games; and (d) provide for a notice system that empowers the Director to give a notice (a barring notice) to a particular person in specified circumstances (including circumstances that relate to whether the Director is satisfied as to a matter or matters); and (e) specify the effect of a barring notice, which may include but is not limited to providing that a person in respect of whom a barring notice is in force may not be authorised to make assessments of the likely classifications of unclassified films or unclassified computer games; and (f) provide for review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of decisions under the scheme; and (g) confer functions and powers on the Board or the Director in relation to and for the purposes of the scheme; and (h) provide for administrative matters, such as the making of applications and the giving of notices. (4) The scheme may specify the circumstances in which an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game may not be advertised. (5) The Minister must consult with participating Ministers before making a determination under subsection (1). (6) A determination under subsection (1) must not be such as to permit the advertisement of a film or computer game that, if the film or computer game were classified, would be likely to be classified RC or X 18+. Subdivision B—Assessments of likely classifications of unclassified films and unclassified computer games 32 Person may apply for assessment of likely classification of unclassified film or unclassified computer game (1) A person who is, or proposes to be, the distributor, exhibitor or publisher of an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game may apply to the Board for an assessment of the likely classification of the film or computer game for the purpose of advertising the film or computer game. (2) The application must: (a) be in writing; and (b) be in a form approved in writing by the Director; and (c) be signed; and (d) include any information, statements, explanations or other matters required by the form; and (e) be accompanied by any other relevant material required by the form; and (f) be accompanied by the prescribed fee. 33 Board may assess likely classification of film or computer game (1) This section applies if an application has been made under section 32 for the assessment of the likely classification of an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game. (2) The Board may assess the classification that, in the opinion of the Board, the film or computer game would be likely to have if the film or computer game were classified, having regard to the material and information available to the Board when making the assessment. (3) The Board may refuse to assess the likely classification of the film or computer game if the Board considers that the material and information available to the Board is insufficient (whether or not the Board has made a request under subsection (4)). (4) The Board may request the applicant to give to the Board, within the period specified in the request, further information for the purpose of enabling the Board to deal with the application. (5) The Board may decline to deal with the application, or decline to further deal with the application, until the information is given to the Board in accordance with the request. (6) To avoid doubt, this section does not require the Board to obtain further information under subsection (4) for the purposes of the Board’s assessment. (7) An assessment made under subsection (2) is not a legislative instrument. 34 Revocation of assessments (1) If, after making an assessment under section 33 of the likely classification of an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game, but before the film or computer game is classified, the Board is of the opinion that: (a) the film or computer game contains, or will contain, material of which the Board was unaware when the Board made the assessment; and (b) if the Board had been aware of the material before making the assessment, it would have assessed the film or computer game as likely to have a higher classification; the Board must revoke the assessment, and must also revoke the approval of any approved advertisement for the film or game. (2) The Board must revoke an assessment under section 33 of the likely classification of a film or computer game, and must also revoke the approval of any approved advertisement for the film or game, if the applicant for the assessment makes a written request that the Board do so. (3) The revocation of an assessment or approved advertisement takes effect: (a) when written notice of the decision to revoke is given under section 35 to the applicant concerned; or (b) if a later day is specified in the instrument of revocation—on that later day. 35 Notice of decisions The Board must give written notice of a decision under section 33 or 34 to the applicant for the assessment or advertisement concerned as soon as practicable but not later than 30 days after the making of the decision. 10 Paragraph 42(1)(b) After “game concerned”, insert “, the applicant for assessment under section 33 of the likely classification of the unclassified film or unclassified computer game concerned,”. 11 Subsection 87A(1)(b) Insert: or (c) an application for an assessment of the likely classification of an unclassified film or an unclassified computer game; 12 Paragraph 97(c) Repeal the paragraph. 13 Transitional regulations (1) The Governor-General may make regulations providing for matters of a transitional nature in relation to the advertising of unclassified films that have been granted a certificate of exemption. (2) In this item: certificate of exemption means a certificate of exemption granted by the Board under section 33 of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, as in force before its repeal by item 9 of this Schedule.

Schedule 2—Amendments relating to films of television series

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 1 Section 5 Insert: authorised television series assessor means a person authorised in accordance with the scheme determined under section 14B to prepare assessments of films comprising one or more episodes of a television series. 2 Before section 15 Insert: 14B Applications for films comprising previously broadcast television series (1) If: (a) an application is made for classification of a film that comprises one or more episodes of a television series; and (b) each of the episodes has, before the making of the application, been broadcast in Australia on a national broadcasting service, a commercial broadcasting service, a subscription broadcasting service or a community broadcasting service; and (c) the applicant is of the opinion that the film would, if classified, be classified at a particular classification that is R 18+ or a lower classification; the applicant may also submit with the application an assessment of the film prepared in accordance with subsection (2). (2) An assessment of a kind referred to in subsection (1) must: (a) satisfy the requirements specified in the scheme determined by the Minister under subsection (3); and (b) be prepared by an authorised television series assessor; and (c) be signed by, or on behalf of, the applicant. (3) The Minister may, by legislative instrument, determine a scheme relating to the assessment of films that comprise one or more episodes of a television series. (4) A scheme under subsection (3) may do the following: (a) specify the requirements for assessments of films that comprise one or more episodes of a television series; (b) specify the basis on which assessments of films that comprise one or more episodes of a television series are to be made; (c) specify requirements for the authorisation of persons as authorised television series assessors under the scheme and for continued authorisation (including the circumstances in which such authorisation may be revoked or suspended); (d) provide for a notice system that empowers the Director to give a notice (a barring notice) to a particular person in specified circumstances (including circumstances that relate to whether the Director is satisfied as to a matter or matters); (e) specify the effect of a barring notice, which may include but is not limited to the following: (i) providing that a person in respect of whom a barring notice is in force may not be authorised to make assessments of films that comprise one or more episodes of a television series; (ii) providing that a person in respect of whom a barring notice is in force may not submit an application for classification under subsection (1); (f) provide for review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of decisions under the scheme; (g) confer functions and powers on the Board or the Director in relation to and for the purposes of the scheme; (h) provide for administrative matters, such as the making of applications and the giving of notices; (i) specify circumstances in which an assessment is taken to be misleading, incorrect or grossly inadequate for the purposes of section 21AB (without limiting those circumstances). (5) The Minister must consult with participating Ministers before determining a scheme under subsection (3). (6) In this section: commercial broadcasting service has the same meaning as in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. community broadcasting service has the same meaning as in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. national broadcasting service has the same meaning as in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. subscription broadcasting service has the same meaning as in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. 3 Before section 22 Insert: 21AB Revocation of classification of films The Board must revoke the classification of a film that has been classified taking into account an assessment prepared by an authorised television series assessor under section 14B if the Board is satisfied that: (a) the assessment was misleading, incorrect or grossly inadequate; and (b) if the Board had been aware of the respects in which the assessment was misleading, incorrect or grossly inadequate before the classification was made, it would have given the film a different classification. Note: The Minister’s determination under section 14B may prescribe circumstances in which an assessment is taken to be misleading, incorrect or grossly inadequate. 4 Application of amendments The amendments made by this Schedule apply to applications for classification of films made on or after the commencement of this Schedule.

***

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT (ADVERTISING AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2007: First Reading
Date 22 March, 2007 
Database House Hansard
Page 1 
Proof Yes
Source House 
Stage First Reading
Type Procedural text 
Context Bills
Main Committee No 

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT (ADVERTISING AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2007 

First Reading Bill and explanatory memorandum presented by Mr Ruddock.

Bill read a first time.

***

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT (ADVERTISING AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2007: Second Reading
Date 22 March, 2007 
Database House Hansard
Speaker Ruddock, Philip, MP (Berowra, Attorney-General, LP, Government) 
Page 1
Proof Yes 
Source House
Stage Second Reading 
Type Speech
Context Bills 
Main Committee No

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT (ADVERTISING AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2007 

Second Reading Speech Mr RUDDOCK (Berowra—Attorney-General) (9.01 a.m.)—I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Advertising and Other Matters) Bill 2007 will amend the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995.

The bill makes amendments to improve the operation of the national classification scheme and will ensure its ongoing smooth operation in a changing technological environment. The amendments will streamline the classification process and reduce the regulatory burden on industry.

The bill contains two areas of reform to classification procedures. It changes the way the classification act deals with the advertising of unclassified product and with television series that are released for sale or hire.

The first initiative is part of a package of reforms which, together with the amendments to the state and territory legislation and a Commonwealth instrument, will permit the advertising of unclassified films and computer games, subject to conditions. In addition, the package of reforms will update the definition of advertisement to explicitly include advertising on the internet and to exclude what is commonly known as product merchandising, such as clothing.

The new advertising scheme was developed following public consultation on a discussion paper released in August last year. This proposal was developed in response to industry concerns that the current advertising framework for unclassified material is cumbersome and outdated. The increasing risk of piracy and rapid advances in technology has led to products being available for classification very close to their release date. The current system therefore causes difficulties for marketing of classifiable products. In light of these changing circumstances, it is no longer tenable to prohibit the advertising of unclassified material with exceptions only available for cinema release films. It is more equitable to remove this prohibition so that cinema releases, DVD and video films, and computer games can be advertised in advance of classification.

This bill enables a legislative instrument to set conditions on advertising unclassified films and computer games. The instrument will establish a strong new advertising message advising consumers to check the classification. It will establish an industry based self-assessment scheme whereby the likely classification of an unclassified film or computer game is assessed when advertising together with classified films or computer games. The instrument will introduce a stronger commensurate audience rule so that advertisements for films and computer games likely to be classified PG may no longer be screened to an audience for a G film or computer game.

The scheme contains safeguards to ensure the integrity of the system and includes amendments to the classification act to enable applications to be made to the classification board on the likely classification of an unclassified film or computer game in difficult cases or where it is not cost-effective for industry to self-assess. Other safeguards will include giving the director the power to revoke an assessor’s status or, in serious cases, bar a distributor from accessing the scheme for up to three years. These powers are designed to deter users from abusing the system or providing lax or inadequate assessments. Decisions by the director to revoke an assessor’s status or bar someone from using the scheme will be reviewable by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Other safeguards will include initial and annual training for individual assessors, random and complaints based auditing procedures of advertising material, and the retaining of existing powers which allow the director to call in advertisements.

The second initiative is to extend the industry based self-assessment scheme to include films that are compilations of episodes of a television series that have already been broadcast in Australia. The bill establishes a television series assessment scheme whereby a person appropriately trained and authorised by the director may recommend to the classification board the classification of a box set of episodes of a television series. The classification board will retain responsibility for classifying the film, but its consideration will be assisted by the assessment of an authorised assessor. To provide flexibility to respond to changing technology and the increasing capacity of storage devices, the details of the scheme will be included in a legislative instrument. The purpose of the proposal is to reduce the cost to industry and the processing time for the classification board.

The scheme will contain safeguards to ensure the integrity of the national classification system similar to those proposed for the advertising reforms. The instrument will include a requirement that the board revoke classifications in specified circumstances which demonstrate that the assessment on which the classification was based was highly unreliable and the board would otherwise have made a different classification decision.

The amendments contained in this bill will ensure that the national classification scheme continues to serve both industry and the public well by responding to the needs of the rapidly evolving world of entertainment media while still guaranteeing the reliability of classification information for consumers. I commend the bill to the House.

Debate (on motion by Ms Plibersek) adjourned.

***

HVP No. 160 2 CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT (ADVERTISING AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2007
Date 22 March, 2007 
Page 1793
Proof Yes 
Database Votes & Proceedings
Source House 
Main Committee No

2 CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT (ADVERTISING AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2007 

Mr Ruddock (Attorney-General), pursuant to notice, presented a Bill for an Act to amend the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, and for related purposes.

Document

Mr Ruddock presented an explanatory memorandum to the bill.

Bill read a first time.

Mr Ruddock moved—That the bill be now read a second time.

Debate adjourned (Ms Plibersek), and the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for the next sitting.

UPDATES
18th March 2007

LE KINK: RC.
LORNA GOES WILD: Cut.

Calvista have just had yet another hardcore DVD banned. LE KINK was Refused Classification on Wednesday. 

LE KINK Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 14 March 2007 
Author HANK HOFFMAN 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company VIVID 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/1136 
Classification Number 5351640D

A previously banned title has been passed after cuts. Calvista censored the DVD of LORNA GOES WILD and have been awarded an X18+ (Explicit Sex). 

LORNA GOES WILD (PRIVATE XXX 35) Film (DVD)
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 23 February 2007 
Author VARIOUS 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company FRASERSIDE HOLDINGS LTD 
Country of Origin EUROPE 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/816 
Classification Number 4173353F

LORNA GOES WILD (PRIVATE XXX 35) Film (DVD)
Classification X 18+ (Restricted to 18 and over.) 
Consumer Advice Explicit sex 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version REVISED 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 7 March 2007 
Author VARIOUS 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company PRIVATE 
Country of Origin EUROPE 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/816 
Classification Number 4251351D

******

Warrnambool Adult Store.

Fresh from their failure to stop an Adult store in Shepparton, the religious-right are now targeting Warrnambool. The city council must now decide if the store can go ahead. 

Protest rally over sex shop. The Standard 08.03.07

Family First senator Steve Fielding has thrown his support behind the mounting opposition, despite cancelling his appearance at the protest due to commitments on a senate inquiry into the sale of Qantas.

The public rally follows the launch of a petition by an action group, calling for the Foreplay adult entertainment store proposal to be struck out by council.

The group argues that the introduction of the city's only adult store will have a detrimental effect on the social, health and moral welfare of the community.

Spokesman Craig Haberfield said Senator Fielding's cancellation did not hinder their effort. ``The rally is still going ahead, it has gained more momentum of its own,'' he said.

***

'No Sex Shop' The Standard 09.03.07

ABOUT 50 protesters armed with a 1000-signature petition yesterday gathered to voice their objection to an adult shop proposed for Warrnambool's industrial estate.

The rally was organised by the South West Community Action Group and held outside the proposed Silverton Park site of the sex shop yesterday afternoon.

Spokesman for the group, Craig Haberfield, led the rally and told the gathering, which included many children, that the community would suffer if the shop opened.

``There is a link between sexual assault and pornography,'' Mr Haberfield said.

``People with sexual problems, they'll enter that store to feed an unhealthy and destructive habit.''

***

Council to rule on sex shop. The Standard 14.03.07

Eros Association executive officer Fiona Patten yesterday said there were no planning reasons to reject the shop proposed by Deon Drake in Warrnambool's industrial estate. ``My understanding is that it meets every single requirement and guideline of the council and it is important that the council approve it rather than let it go through to the keeper at VCAT,'' Ms Patten said.

``If it went to VCAT it would be a waste of ratepayers' money.'' Ms Patten said the council should not give in to a vocal minority.

``For every one person outraged there are another 100 who couldn't give a damn,'' she said.

The council has received more than six objections to the shop. A spokeswoman said the application was expected to be considered at either of the next two general council meetings.

``It depends on the processing of the application and submissions but it will be in either three or six weeks,'' she said.

******

X18+ in NSW.

The NSW State election is due to be held next Saturday. Now is probably a good time to remind you how everyone voted back in June 2005 when Peter Breen's bill to legalise X18+ was being debated. More information can be found here.

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) ENFORCEMENT AMENDMENT (X 18+ FILMS) BILL

Ayes, 5
Mr Peter Breen (Independent)
Ms Sylvia Hale (Greens)
Ms Lee Rhiannon (Greens)

Tellers, 
Dr Arthur Chesterfield-Evans (Democrats)
Mr Ian Cohen (Greens)

Noes, 32
Ms Janice Burnswoods (Labor)
Mr Antonio Catanzariti (Labor)
Mr David Clarke (Liberal)
Mr Richard Colless (Nationals)
Mr Michael Costa (Labor)
Ms Catherine Cusack (Liberal)
Mr John Della Bosca (Labor)
Mr Greg Donnelly (Labor)
Mrs Patricia Forsythe (Liberal)
Mr Michael Gallacher (Liberal)
Miss Jennifer Gardiner (Nationals)
Mr Duncan Gay (National)
Ms Kayee Griffin (Labor)
Mr John Hatzistergos (Labor)
Mr Tony Kelly (Labor)
Mr Charlie Lynn (Liberal)
Mr Ian Macdonald (Labor)
Reverend Dr Gordon Moyes (Christian Democratic Party)
Reverend Fred Nile (Christian Democratic Party)
Mr Eddie Obeid (Labor)
Mr David Oldfield (Independent)
Ms Robyn Parker (Liberal)
Mrs Melinda Pavey (Nationals)
Mr Gregory Pearce (Liberal)
Ms Christine Robertson (Labor)
Mr John Ryan (Liberal)
Ms Carmel Tebbutt (Labor)
Mr John Tingle (Shooters Party)
Mr Henry Tsang (Labor)
Mr Ian West (Labor)

Tellers,
Mr Donald Harwin (Liberal)
Mr Peter Primrose (Labor)

***

On a related note, the Liberals have been forced to deny they will legalise X18+ in NSW.

Sex gets put in the spotlight. Border Mail 16.03.07

THE scent of a sex scandal has spiced up the NSW election campaign, with the Opposition forced to reject claims it would lift bans on X-rated films.

The Eros Association yesterday tried to inject some excitement into what has been a fairly dull campaign, claiming the Opposition planned to relax NSW’s censorship laws to allow the sale of X18+ rated non-violent erotica.

The association said Opposition legal affairs spokesman Chris Hartcher had written a letter this month suggesting Coalition support for the Federal Government’s censorship policy, which allows for the sale of X-rated films.

However, with state governments across the country having slapped their own bans on X-rated movies, they can only legally be sold in the Northern Territory and the ACT.

Mr Hartcher said yesterday the State Coalition believed the national classification system was not strict enough and there were no plans to lift bans on X-rated films being sold in NSW.

“We say X-rated videos should be prohibited, that’s always been our position, and we haven’t changed,” he said.

“While we want a national system, we don’t support the present national system because the present national system is too lenient.

“So the Eros Association has nothing to take comfort from. There’s no change to our position.”

******

New Censorship Bill Revised.

As reported in the last update, the proposed Communications Legislation Amendment (Content Services) Bill has been causing quite a stir.

Crikey have been responsible for some of the best reporting, including last weeks publication of a leaked draft of the bill. This has resulted in the government making some major changes, and being more willing to consult with key groups.

Government backs down on plan to censor online media content. Crikey.com.au 09.03.07

Crikey has seen a recently authored departmental position paper that lays out major changes being made to the draft Bill, which was leaked to and published by Crikey earlier this week.

The position paper states that the Minister, Senator Helen Coonan, "has decided to amend the approach taken in the original exposure draft".

In particular, the Government has junked the extraordinary plan to make it a criminal offence to provide "prohibited" or "potentially prohibited" content online.

Instead, the Australian Communications and Media Authority will be given powers to issue "take down" notices to those who have posted or streamed problematic material. This is consistent with the present system of regulation for Internet content.

***

Coonan rejects online censorship fears. The Age 15.03.07

Publishers can be assured that proposed new classification rules will not ban or restrict online publications of material currently sold over the counter, Communications Minister Helen Coonan says.

Senator Coonan is to meet Australian book publishers later today to discuss government proposals for standardised online and television classification rules.

Publishers are concerned that the new system - sparked by the furore surrounding the Big Brother reality TV show "turkey-slapping" incident last year - may create a defacto censorship system, which means books now available from shops might have their online versions banned.

Senator Coonan said the objective was to streamline rules for electronic content, irrespective of how that content was delivered.

***

No bans in new rules - Coonan The Australian 15.03.07

"The confusion has really arisen because ... there's different classifications across different mediums," she told ABC radio.

"Books and magazines don't have to be classified at all. The intent that I have is, that apart from restricted categories, they won't have to be restricted if they are online.

Senator Coonan said that was her main objective.

"You can take the current arrangements and translate them online. The new legislation is not intended to make material that is currently legal illegal or inaccessible," she said.

"It is important that we work through the current classifications."

Senator Coonan said the government wanted to do this to protect children from harmful online content or through new devices such as 3G phones.

She said classification categories did need to be aligned as there were different classifications for films, computer games, books and magazines as well as internet content.

On top of that are differing state and territory laws and the criminal code.

"By the time you get to live streaming, which is what the Big Brother (turkey slapping) incident was all about, you have got an unregulated space," she said.

"What we are trying to do is to make it consistent, practical, not onerous for anyone ... the snapshot we took from consultations has thrown up the fact that there needs to be a better look at making sure that there are not these barriers."

***

Following reassurances from the Government, Maree McCaskill from the Publisher's Association spoke to the ABC.

New Bill no threat to literary freedom. ABC PM Program

MAREE MCCASKILL: The legislation was basically a bit of an omnibus bit of legislation and it's thrown up this anomaly that would have in fact taken all of the book publishers and put them into a process whereby their material would have had to have been classified as films and video games etc. have to be now.

SABRA LANE: You've have a meeting with the Communications Minister today Helen Coonan. Tell me what happened in that meeting and what assurances you've been given.

MAREE MCCASKILL: OK. Well, we met with the Minister's Chief of Staff and Policy person. The Minister herself was called away and actually had to go and do something else so we met with the Chief of Staff and essentially they were very good.

They laid their cards on the table and said that this had thrown up a real anomaly for them where they were unaware that our class or group of people existed because we weren't part of the normal consultation model that the Department would normally see. I think they quite readily admitted that the consultation process had dealt with the big carriers, the mobile phone people, the internet industry people, but they hadn't really thought about content providers.

So they were more than happy to delay the submission of the Bill into Parliament until such time as some of these anomalies had been ironed out.

SABRA LANE: What kind of guarantees have they given you about the new legislation that they're going to draft and are you happy with it?

MAREE MCCASKILL: Well yes. The guarantees certainly have said that the criminal penalties have been removed and that we are likely to be subject to what we're subject to now which is a notice and take down, so from that perspective that makes it a lot easier to live with.

They have certainly given us a guarantee that we will see the draft Bill, we will be given a copy of a discussion paper which largely outlines what the drivers are and what the Department is attempting to do, and that until - their words were - "until the publishers are happy and satisfied with the new draft, they will not put it up for parliamentary examination".

SABRA LANE: You have recognised though that there will be some changes in regards to some books.

MAREE MCASKILL: For books or text and still pictures that are digitally transferred, so it will really only be an electronic version of exactly the same thing as a printed book, there would be no problems.

If it is a book or an electronic book that is first published electronically not in print form, and might have interactive links to other websites, then it becomes an entirely different proposition. It's not a normal book. It would then have to submit itself to the same sort of classification regime that computer games and films currently do. And I think that's perfectly reasonable because it isn't a normal straight book as the genre that we know a printed book is.

SABRA LANE: You feared that the original legislation would completely harm your industry. You've now been satisfied that whatever they come up with now, you'll be happy with.

MAREE MCASKILL: Well, we're satisfied to the point where we have as yet to see the Bill. When we've seen the Bill, we will then, and we believe that we are satisfied, we will. But on the reassurances today, without seeing the Bill, I think they have taken on board our concerns, recognised that there was a real issue for publishers and have been willing to sit down and redraft and look at the whole issue again and I think for that we have to give them our full credit that they could have quite easily marched ahead and put the legislation in. However I think it would have thrown up many more problems.

******

Internet Filers Delayed.

ZDNet Australia are reporting that the Government's proposed internet filters have been delayed. Evaluation of the software will not begin until April at the earliest. 

******

Phillip Adams on Censorship.

Phillip Adams had a great opinion piece in yesterday's edition of The Australian. Grab yourself a copy of the Umbrella Entertainment DVD release of THE NAKED BUNYIP if you want to hear more about his sometimes hilarious dealings with the censor R.J. Prowse.

Ban it and watch it flourish. The Australian 17.03.07

.... if you want something to flourish, ban it. Thus prohibition is the drug pusher’s best friend and secrecy the surest way of spreading secrets. As a young film-maker I loved R.J. Prowse, hallowed be his name. Australia’s chief censor (1964-70) would snip and slash with his sanctimonious scissors and the subsequent kerfuffle provided our publicity. In every attempt to suppress anything you’ve got a marketing campaign, and in the age of the www, a global shopping mall.

Taboo or not taboo? If you want to promote something, persuade the church or state to condemn it or, better still, ban it. Even mild social disapproval can be a help in regard to everything from haircuts to hemlines. One of the army of Fred Niles will fall for it, denounce it and you’re home and hosed. I’ve fallen for it myself. While ridiculing the taboos that had Lady Chatterley’s Lover, Oz magazine, Mary McCarthy’s The Group and a little Swedish film called I Am Curious (Yellow) in trouble with the authorities, and while campaigning to have the bans on porn lifted, I railed against the pornographies of violence. How hypocritical to ban images of lovemaking while filling cinema and TV screens with images of slaughter.

George Miller’s first feature, Mad Max, was a case in point. The brilliance of Miller’s direction made the sadism and savagery doubly effective and I attacked the film as a prime example of the pornography of violence – only to find my protests included in the film’s advertising campaign, Adams filling in for Fred Nile.

I should have learnt my lesson, but was spotted evacuating a cinema screening a turkey called Turkey Shoot, wherein animal liberationist Lynda Stoner was subjected to more brutal indignities than Arthur Dignam. Yet again my disapproval was featured in the ads. “See the movie Adams walked out on!” Perhaps the better protest would be the kiss of death – warm approval for the pornographic representations of pain and suffering in, for example, Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ and Apocalypto.

Certainly humour was a devastating weapon against the silliness of Australian sexual censorship. Cross my heart, it got close to having sniffer dogs at airports trained to nose out naughty novels. By laughing at censors, customs officers, judges and cops, we embarrassed the governments into giving up. But think of the help the wowsers gave us. In Melbourne, for example, the Vice Squad raided the Myer Emporium and arrested a largish copy of Michelangelo’s David.

******

GETTING UP: The download.

This week it was discovered that GETTING UP: CONTENTS UNDER PRESSURE was available for download from www.quicky.com.au. The games was originally rated MA15+ (Strong Violence, Strong Themes) in November 2005. This was overturned by the Review Board in February 2006 when they increased it to RC. 

******

NZ vs. Aus Censorship.

Anyone who has visited a video store in New Zealand will soon notice that most of the DVDs are Australian, with the NZOFLC rating stuck over the top of the AusOFLC ones. Any film rated G, PG, or M by the AusOFLC does not get viewed by the NZOFLC. Now Bill Hastings, the Chief Censor, is expressing his concern that the AusOFLC are too lenient on violence.

Censor says Australian classifications too liberal on violence. The New Zealand Herald 15.03.07

National MP Sandra Goudie said she understood Australian censors were more liberal, and asked if this was an issue.

Mr Hastings said he shared her concern, particularly in relation to films rated M.

"It strikes me - we have not done a study on it - at the M level we are seeing more violence from Australia than we would allow at the New Zealand level - it's almost R16 level."

Any change to the way these films were rated would require a change to the legislation, he said.

******

PICTURE PREMIUM #104: Modified.

The Unrestricted issue #104 of THE PICTURE PREMIUM magazine has been modified in order to gain an Unrestricted rating. The proof print was originally rated Category 1 on March 9th. 

THE PICTURE PREMIUM NO 104 (said to be unrestricted)
Publication (Magazine) 
Classification Category 1 Restricted 
Consumer Advice 
Category Publication 
Version PROOF PRINT 
Duration 106 page(s) 
Date of Classification 9 March 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher ACP EXTRA 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin AUSTRALIA 
Applicant ACP EXTRA - PICTURE PREMIUM 
File Number L07/41 
Classification Number 6751340C

THE PICTURE PREMIUM NO 104 (said to be unrestricted) Publication (Magazine) 
Classification Unrestricted 
Consumer Advice M - not recommended for readers under 15 years. 
Category Publication 
Version MODIFIED PROOF PRINT 
Duration 106 page(s) 
Date of Classification 14 March 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher ACP EXTRA 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin AUSTRALIA 
Applicant ACP EXTRA - PICTURE PREMIUM 
File Number L07/41 
Classification Number 5251343D

******

NOTES ON A SCANDAL: RB Report.

The Review Board have just released their report into NOTES ON A SCANDAL. Twentieth Century Fox Film Distributors mounted a challenge against the MA15+ awarded by the Classification Board. The appeal failed and the Review Board changed the consumer advice from ‘Strong Themes, Strong Sexual References’ to 'Adult Themes and Sexual References Involving a Minor'.

Australian Government
Classification Review Board
24 January 2007 

23-33 MARY STREET SURRY HILLS, NSW 

MEMBERS: 
Ms Maureen Shelley (Convenor) 
Ms Ann Stark 
Ms Kathryn Smith 

APPLICANT: 
20th Century Fox represented by: 
Mr John Dickie – Fox Consultant

Mr Paul De Carvalho – Manager, Searchlight Films 

BUSINESS: To review the Classification Board’s decision to classify the film Notes on a Scandal MA 15+ with the consumer advice ‘Strong themes, Strong sexual references’. 

Also present: Secretariat support, Office of Film and Literature Classification 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION 

1. Decision The Classification Review Board (the Review Board) classified the film Notes on a Scandal MA 15+ with the consumer advice ‘Strong sexual references involving a minor, Strong adult themes’. 

2. Legislative provisions 

The Classification (Publications, Film and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Act) governs the classification of films and the review of classification decisions. Section 9 of the Act provides that films are to be classified in accordance with the National Classification Code (the Code) and the classification guidelines.

Three essential principles underlie the use of the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2005 (the Guidelines), determined under s.12 of the Act: 

· The importance of context 

· Assessing impact 

· Six classifiable elements – themes, violence, sex, language, drug use and nudity. 

3. Procedure 

Having earlier received a valid written application for review, three members of the Review Board viewed the film Notes on a Scandal at the Review Board’s meeting on 24 January 2007. 

The Review Board then received a verbal submission from Mr John Dickie representing the Applicant, which was confirmed in a written submission. Mr Carvalho also attended on behalf of the Applicant during Mr Dickie’s verbal submission. 

The Board then met in camera to consider the matter. 

4. Evidence and other material taken into account 

In reaching its decision the Review Board had regard to the following: 

(i) 20th Century Fox’s application for review; 

(ii) 20th Century Fox’s written and oral submissions; 

(iii) The film, Notes on a Scandal; 

(iv) relevant provisions in the Act; 

(v) relevant provisions in the Code, as amended in accordance with s 6 of the Act; and 

(vi) the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2005. 

5 Synopsis 

Sheba, employed as a teacher at a London high school, has an inappropriate sexual relationship with Steven, a 15-year-old student. Barbara, a lonely colleague, discovers Sheba’s secret and decides to use the information to manipulate her way into Sheba’s life. 

6 Findings on material questions of fact 

The Review Board found that the film contains aspects or scenes particularly worthy of mention under various classifiable elements: 

Themes – “Themes” is defined in the Guidelines as “social issues, such as crime, suicide, drug and alcohol dependency, death, serious illness, family breakdown and racism”.  

(a) Themes – There are strong themes of an inappropriate sexual relationship between a 15-year-old, male, high school student, Steven, and his female teacher, Sheba, and how another female teacher, Barbara, uses this information to ingratiate her way into Sheba’s life. These themes are justified by context and are treated in a restrained and non- gratuitous, nonexploitative manner. These themes are cumulative in impact.

Some instances in which these themes are evident include: 

At 23-24 minutes Sheba offers to give Steven special individual lessons. She touches his hair and he asks her to repeat this. 

At 26 minutes Steven puts his hand on Sheba’s neck and tells her she is beautiful. 

At 29 minutes Sheba and Steven kiss and have implied sex on the ground at a railway station in the dark. Sheba tells him they must keep their relationship secret. 

At 30.30 minutes as they lie together on the ground, Sheba mentions her daughter, Steven asks if she is the same age as him. 

Barbara discovers the relationship and demands that Sheba put an end to it, but promises she will not tell anyone. Sheba tries to end the affair but Steven wants to continue. 

At 41 minutes Sheba and Steven kiss passionately outside her home. 

At 43.15 minutes Sheba and Steven have implied sexual relations. 

At 44.10 minutes Sheba and Steven kiss, talk about Sheba’s children and have implied sex in Sheba’s pottery shed. 

Sheba and Steven end the affair when Barbara threatens to reveal the affair. Steven admits he lied about his father abusing him and tells Sheba their affair “was only meant to be a bit of fun” (52.30 minutes). 

Barbara’s demands and threats to Sheba become more menacing. 

At 63.55 minutes Barbara informs another teacher that Sheba is “interested in boys”. 

At 67 minutes Steven’s mother confronts Sheba in her home, slapping Sheba several times while her husband tries to restrain her. Steven’s mother calls Sheba a bitch and tells Sheba’s husband about her inappropriate relationship with Steven. Sheba’s teenage daughter is listening on the stairs. 

At 68 minutes Sheba’s husband screams at her for having sex with a 15-yearold boy. 

At 69.10 minutes Sheba is arrested by the police. 

At 74 minutes Sheba’s teenage daughter verbally abuses her mother for having a “boyfriend younger than mine”. She yells: “You slept with a child”. 

To avoid the media crowded outside her home Sheba goes to Barbara’s home to stay. Sheba finds Barbara’s diary, realises the true nature of Barbara’s friendship with her, and starts ransacking Barbara’s house. Barbara and Sheba physically and verbally fight. (79-83 minutes) 

(b) Violence – There is very little violence in the film. That which is depicted (67 minutes, 79-83 minutes) is justified by context and moderate in impact. 

(c) Sex – The film contains implied sexual activity and sexual references involving an adult (teacher) and a minor (student), which are strong in impact. 

At 21.15 minutes Barbara is looking for Sheba in the school and sees her in a room implicitly fellating a male whose identity cannot be seen. Barbara then sees and identifies Steven, a 15-year-old student, leaving the room. The implied sexual activity is brief and the lighting is poor. 

At 39.10 minutes Sheba receives a text message on her mobile phone from Steven “i wish i woz fucking u blind”. 

At 43.15 minutes Steven and Sheba have implicit sexual intercourse. In a darkly lit pottery shed at Sheba’s home. Steven is depicted lying on top of Sheba, thrusting. Sheba makes sounds suggestive of sex. The scene is brief and viewed from above. 

At 45 minutes there is a brief depiction of Steven’s naked torso from the hips up, followed by a more distant sight of Steven’s apparently naked body, from the hips up. 

At 49 minutes Barbara hears Steven’s voice on Sheba’s phone say “dreaming about your hot sweet cunt all morning”. 

At 82 minutes when Sheba reads Barbara’s diary she throws her against a cabinet and screams, “Do you want to fuck me, Barbara?” 

The sexual references described above are strong in impact due to some of the references involving sexual relations with a minor. 

(d) Language –There is moderate coarse language in the film. There is some aggressive coarse language but this is infrequent and justified by context, and could be accommodated at the M classification. 

7 Reasons for the decision 

The Review Board based its decision to classify the film Notes on a Scandal MA 15+ with the consumer advice, “Strong sexual references involving a 5 minor, Strong adult themes” on the content of the film as set out in section 5 above. The cumulative strong impact of the adult themes and implied sexual scenes involving a minor, make this film unsuitable for children under 15.

Notes on a Scandal is a serious, intense film dealing with the role of the teacher and her abuse of her position of trust in having a relationship with a 15-year-old student. The community has real concerns about the portrayal of minors in sexual situations, even where the relationship is apparently consensual.

The Review Board acknowledges the film has artistic merit, and believes that the potentially controversial scenes are treated sensitively, depicted in context and not gratuitous. The Review Board found that the impact of these scenes and the accompanying destructive relationship pursued by the predatory Barbara is strong in impact. 

8 Summary 

Notes on a Scandal deals with the serious theme of the inappropriate sexual relations between a person in authority and a minor. Alongside this theme of betrayal of trust is that of the pursuit of a predatory and manipulative woman pursuing a relationship with her colleague over whom she has power. 

The Review Board unanimously finds that the impact of the classifiable elements in the film is strong, but not so high as to warrant a more restrictive rating than the already legally restrictive “MA 15+” classification. The film is considered unsuitable for persons less than 15 years and warrants consumer advice relating to adult themes and sexual references involving a minor.

******

300: RB Report. 

The Review Board have also released their report into the film 300. The appeal by Roadshow Films saw the R18+(High Level Battle Violence) rating dropped to MA15+ (Strong Computer-Generated Battle Violence, Death and War Themes)

Australian Government
Classification Review Board

Hearing and decision: 28 February 2007 

23-33 MARY STREET SURRY HILLS, NSW 

MEMBERS: 
Ms Maureen Shelley 
Mrs Gillian Groom 
Mr Anthony Hetrih 

APPLICANT: 
Roadshow Films 

BUSINESS: To review the Classification Board’s decision to classify the film 300  R18+ with the consumer advice ‘High level battle violence’. 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION 

1. Decision 

The Classification Review Board (the Review Board) classified the film MA 15+ with the consumer advice ‘Strong computer-generated battle violence, Death and war themes’. 

2. Legislative provisions 

The Classification (Publications, Film and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Act) governs the classification of films and the review of classification decisions. Section 9 of the Act provides that films are to be classified in accordance with the National Classification Code (the Code) and the classification guidelines.

Three essential principles underlie the use of the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2005 (the Guidelines), determined under s 12 of the Act: 

· The importance of context 

· Assessing impact 

· Six classifiable elements – themes, violence, sex, language, drug use and nudity. 

3. Procedure 

The Review Board met on 28 February 2007 in response to the receipt of a valid application from the applicant, Roadshow Films, on 15 February 2007. 

Three members of the Review Board viewed the film 300 at the Board’s meeting on 28 February 2007. 

The Review Board then received an oral submission from Mr Brett Rosengarten representing the Applicant. This was provided in addition to a written submission. 

The Review Board then considered the matter. 

4. Evidence and other material taken into account 

In reaching its decision the Review Board had regard to the following: 

(i) Roadshow Film’s application for review; 

(ii) Roadshow Film’s written and oral submissions; 

(iii) the film, 300; 

(iv) the Classification Board’s report; and 

(v) the relevant provisions in the Act, the Code and the Guidelines. 

5. Synopsis 

Based on Frank Miller’s epic graphic novel (adult comic), 300 is a retelling of the ancient Battle of Thermopylae. Set in 480 BC, the king of Sparta – Leonidas – leads an elite squad of 300 Spartan warriors against a massive invading force from Persia. With 1,000,000 Persian soldiers at Xerxes’ disposal, the Spartans face insurmountable odds as they battle to the death, for valour and the freedom of their homeland. 

6. Findings on material questions of fact 

The Review Board found that the film contains aspects or scenes particularly worthy of mention under various classifiable elements: 

(a) Themes 

The themes that are evident throughout the film are those of warfare and death. The Spartans are trained as warriors from birth and believe it is the highest honour to die in battle. They also have a unique style of fighting, where each warrior is responsible for protecting those fighting at their side. Other themes include fighting to the death in the face of insurmountable odds, the strict necessity of fighting for freedom, it being essential for a Spartan to show valour in battle, and the importance of a heroic death. 

(b) Violence 

The film contains violence that is no greater than strong in impact. 

• There are a number of violent battle scenes at approximately 47mins, 63mins, 82mins and 94mins. These scenes depict liberal blood splatter – in muted unrealistic tones – and shots of trauma to combatants including the occasional dismemberment of arms and legs, beheadings, and impalement by spears and arrows. It should be noted that the almost black blood spray and flow was highly stylised and unrealistic, almost choreographed, in its motion within the frame. The blood spatter did not land on any person. 

• The Review Board determined that the scene, which commences at approximately 65mins, in which a giant troll-like warrior – such as generally seen in the fantasy genre – joins the battle, has the strongest impact in the film. In addition to the battle violence taking place there is a detailed depiction and close-up of a sword being pulled out of the creature’s bicep (approximately 66mins), followed by it being stabbed in the eye (approximately 67mins), and its beheading, which is framed from the back of the creature. It was noted that the troll seemed unaffected by pain and the initial wounds inflicted on it and there was a lack of realistic arterial spray when it was decapitated. While this sequence had detail, the Review Board determined that it was unrealistic, particularly given the fantasy-genre creature depicted, and could be accommodated within the MA 15+ classification. 

• Another scene with detail is the beheading, which occurs in the lull of the battle at approximately 74mins. The scene plays out in slow motion as a soldier mounted on a horse cuts down one of the Spartan warriors. The body is seen standing headless for some seconds and then crumples to the ground. There was no arterial spray or blood gushing from the wound, which added to the unrealistic dream-like quality of the scene and lessened its impact. This unreal sense was reinforced by the music and the mid to long shot of the action drawing away from the battle. 

7. Reasons for the decision 

It was the unanimous determination of the Review Board that the relevant classifiable element for the purposes of determining the classification of the film was violence. 

The Guidelines state that the impact of material classified MA 15+ should be no higher than strong. 

The Review Board determined that while there was frequent violence depicted in 300, its impact was lessened due to the computer-generated visuals and stylistic treatment of the film. Much of the battle action was almost balletic in depiction, having a choreographed appearance. Slow-motion was used to display the manly grace and athletic appearance of the warriors rather than the gore of battle, which was noticeably absent. Further, a number of sequences appeared composed to be similar to paintings by Rubens and two scenes depicted Renaissance-era paintings. 

The cumulative impact of the violence in the film was no higher than strong for the following reasons: 

While the story has some historical significance (it is based on the historical Battle of Thermopylae), the source material for the film is a graphic novel and as such retells the story in an “over the top” manner. Many fantasy elements are used such as the hunchback, numerous monsters, a giant troll-like warrior and the huge battle rhino with rider. These clearly computer-generated characters add to the fantasy-genre style of the film. These elements help to emphasize the unrealistic, comic-book nature of the battles and violence within the movie.

Further evidence of this “over the top” treatment is seen in the character of Xerxes who is shown as a 2m-tall figure wearing black eyeliner, gold draperies and piercings. His overplaying of all his scenes adds to the “camp” style of the film and provides some comic relief, particularly given his Mardi Gras-style “float” that he uses when going into battle. 

While the movie does contain frequent violence, the highly stylised nature of the film lessens the overall impact making the impact of the violence no more than strong. This is illustrated by the: 

· dull, muted colours and sepia tones used throughout the film; 

· computer-generated backgrounds and characters and visual effect treatments; and the 

· use of slow motion and close-ups to capture the classically choreographed battle poses and the “larger than life” physiques of some of the characters. 

While blood splatter is liberally used throughout the battle scenes it is highly unrealistic, computer generated and almost videogame-like in nature. The colour of the blood is also so muted, that it appears to be almost black. The blood splatter does not appear to land on any victim and there are few instances of characters seen with bloodied faces or bodies – including those that are decapitated, speared or hacked with a sword. 

Having regard to the standards of the community, the Review Board determined that the highly-stylised and unrealistic nature of the violence in this film were of no greater – and in some instances far less – than other similar films that have been routinely classified MA 15+. It concluded that the community would, as a whole, expect the level of violence depicted in this film at an MA 15+ classification. 

8. Summary 

In a unanimous decision the Review Board determined that 300 should be classified MA 15+ with the consumer advice ‘Strong computer-generated battle violence, Death and war themes’.

UPDATES
6th March 2007

VIVA EROTICA in Court.

AdultShop.com's case against the Classification Review Board began on March 1st in the Federal court in Sydney.

******

300: MA15+ by RB.

The film adaptation of Frank Miller's 300 graphic novel was hit with an R18+(High Level Battle Violence) rating back in mid-February. At the time this certainly looked harsh considering that much stricter countries such as the UK and Ireland were awarding it 15 and 16 age ratings. So it was no surprise to see Roadshow Films launch an appeal to have it dropped to MA15+.

It proved to be a success; the R18+(High Level Battle Violence) rating has been dropped to MA15+ (Strong Computer-Generated Battle Violence, Death and War Themes)

Australian Government
Classification Review Board
27 February 2007 
MEDIA RELEASE 

Review announced for the film 300 

The Classification Review Board has received an application to review the classification for the film, 300. 

300 was classified R 18+ with the consumer advice, “High level battle violence”, by the Classification Board on 14 February 2007. 

The Classification Review Board will meet on Wednesday 28 February 2007 to consider the application. 

The Classification Review Board’s decision and reasons for its decision will appear on the OFLC website once the review has been finalised. 

The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review body. Meeting in camera, it makes a fresh classification decision upon receipt of an application for review. The Classification Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board. 

Australian Government
Classification Review Board
28 February 2007 
MEDIA RELEASE 

300 classified MA 15+ upon review 

A 3-member panel of the Classification Review Board has determined, in a unanimous decision, that the film, 300 is classified MA 15+ with the consumer advice, “Strong computer-generated battle violence, Death and war themes”. 

In the Classification Review Board’s opinion, 300 warrants an MA 15+ classification because the impact of the violence in the film is no more than strong due to its highly-stylised treatment. 

“Whilst the subject is the battle of the Spartans and Persians at Thermopylae, the battle violence is computer-generated in muted tones and classically choreographed poses,” said Classification Review Board Convenor, Maureen Shelley, “While the film will appeal strongly to older teens, particularly computer gamers and graphic novel fans, it is unsuitable for children under 15.” 

MA 15+ is a legally restricted classification. Films classified MA 15+ are not suitable for persons under 15 years of age. Persons aged under 15 years must be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian in order to gain entry to the film. 

The Classification Review Board convened today in response to an application from the distributor, Roadshow Films, to review the R 18+ classification of 300 made by the Classification Board on 14 February 2007.

In reviewing the classification, the Classification Review Board worked within the framework of the National Classification Scheme, applying the provisions of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the National Classification Code and the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games. 

The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review body. Meeting in camera, it makes a fresh classification decision upon receipt of an application for review. This Classification Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board.

The Classification Review Board’s reasons for this decision will appear on the OFLC website when finalised. 

******

THE HANGING: RC Reasons.

The Eros Association have issued a media release regarding the RC rating awarded to THE HANGING. It shows that it was a close call, with seven Classification Board members viewing it. Four voted for RC, one for R18+, one for MA15+, and one for M!

******

LAID UP: X18+ Cut.

LAID UP, the gay hardcore DVD that was originally banned back in December 2006 has finally been passed. Calvista were awarded an X18+ (Explicit Sex) for a censored version on Wednesday.

LAID UP Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 11 December 2006
Author BRIAN MILLS , HAROLD CREG
Publisher BRIAN MILLS 
Production Company TITAN MEDIA / TITANMEN.COM 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD
File Number T06/5339 
Classification Number 5051752F

LAID UP Film (DVD) 
Classification X 18+ (Restricted to 18 and over.) 
Consumer Advice Explicit sex 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version REVISED 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 28 February 2007
Author BRIAN MILLS 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company TITAN 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T06/5339 
Classification Number 4072552F

******

Des Clark on the Future.

Des Clark has been the Director of the OFLC for seven years, and will step aside in April.

Randolph Ramsay at GameSpot AU has an excellent interview with Mr Clark. In it he speaks about future challenges for game ratings in Australia.

Q&A: Aussie ratings board head Des Clark. au.Gamespot.com 28.02.07

GS AU: Do you think the Australian community is generally accepting of the fact that we don't have an R rating for games?

DC: The community is very, very accepting of the current system. Those are issues [introducing an R rating] that government ministers have considered in the past and are not prepared to proceed with, so that's the way it is. That's the reality.

GS AU: For games, how important are classifications, particularly for parents looking for advice?

DC: I think it's really important, because there's a lack of certainty with a lot of parents about what the content is likely to be. There's a broader lack of trust within some sectors of the community about games, and so therefore the more that ratings of games are providing sound advice for parents, the more we will build greater trust in the games and their content, and especially teach young children how to play with them and make choices.

GS AU: Should Australia have an R rating for games?

DC: That's a policy question and not something the Classification Board will respond to in any way.

GS AU: Do you forecast that it will eventually happen?

DC: I'm not speculating.

******

Des Clark also made some interesting comments in the Australian Financial Review.

Departing censor admits to digital defeat. AFR 26.02.07

The nation's chief censor has admitted that trying to ban inappropriate content in films, computer games and pornography was a losing battle in the digital age. 

The outgoing director of the Office of Film and Literature Classification, Des Clark, said the difficulty in restricting content across borders meant that consumers would increasingly have to decide for themselves what was appropriate. 

"It seems to me that if you have this global stuff where you're not I able to harness it, what comes into! play - for instance with online gaming - is that you have protocols established by users... it's not something that government is necessarily able to regulate,"  

"I suspect there's a whole lot of intuitive classification that happens." Mr Clark said technology allowed people access to "strong and controversial content that was not available or easily available beforehand", and that self-regulation was part of the pathway to reconcile local and global values. 

"The classification s system is particularly sensitive to interactivity, and rewards for I interactivity. Whether it involves sex or violence, if people are rewarded for inappropriate activities, like drug taking, killing, we look at that much more harshly." 

******

New Censorship Bill.

Fresh from hearing the Director of the OFLC stating the obvious. That is censorship is near impossible in the digital age. News comes in that the Government is going to introduce a bill to classify everything!

Check-out Ross Fitzgerald's great opinion piece in The Australian

Content bill reads far too much in to the big screen. The Australian 26.02.07

A couple of weeks ago Coonan issued an exposure draft of the Content Services Bill to a handful of players and, with no consultation, prepared to introduce it into the present session of parliament.

However, alarm bells have started ringing in many quarters as the intent and irrationality of this bill becomes increasingly apparent.

By my count, up to 65 per cent of Howard's Government members are either publicly stated or born-again Christians. According to Tony Abbott almost half the federal cabinet are Catholics. The morally devout Lyons Forum group within the Coalition has, in the past, claimed up to half the Government as members.

Many Australians will see the Content Services Bill as reflecting the views of these groups in government and not the wider community.

***

Crikey Says. 01.03.07

What the government is apparently proposing, according to a report in Bookseller and Publisher yesterday and in Crikey today, is that all published material in any medium will have to be classified, and the classification of text and still images will be regulated by using film classification guidelines.

Does this mean that all newspapers, magazines and websites will require a government classification before they publish? Does the government plan to establish a vast censorship apparatus to handle the millions of words and images that will require vetting each day?

***

Govt bill could restrict literature, publishers warn 
ABC PM Program
Thursday, 1 March , 2007 

MARK COLVIN: Australian publishers are warning that the Federal Government's about to impose an unprecedented crackdown on books, magazines and other writings.

They're worried about something called the Content Services Bill, which the Government says is aimed at material sent over mobile phones and other devices, to make sure children don't have access to explicit material.

But the publishers say the draft bill is too broad. They believe it'll bog down the Office of Film and Literature Classification, with checks on every book and magazine.

The peak body representing mobile phone carriers is also worried that the bill could turn out to be a red tape nightmare for its members.

The Communications Minister says she'll modify the bill further if it needs changes.

Sabra Lane reports.

SABRA LANE: If you believe the Australian Publishers Association, it says last year's Big Brother brouhaha will led to the Federal Government becoming Big Brother.

Maree McCaskill, the Association's Chief Executive says the Government's proposed laws regulating content on mobile phones and PDAs (personal digital assistants) are seriously flawed.

She says the draft bill's so broad, it will mean everything, including books and magazines, will have to be cleared by the country's chief censor before they're published.

MAREE MCCASKILL: From my enquiries this has been somewhat of a knee-jerk reaction to the Big Brother episode.

The, I think, Federal Government has cast the net very wide in their draft, not realising that that they are going to catch a whole lot of normal, legitimate pursuits, ie, book publishers, novels, literature et cetera in this net, which is going to require a massive classification system.

And I would hope that the Federal Government in its wisdom, will think carefully to consult with the content providers first before they decide to put this bill up, which I believe is going to go up in the autumn session of Parliament.

SABRA LANE: I've spoken with the Minister's office just a short time ago. They said this bill relates only to convergent devices, so mobile phones and things like personal digital assistants and I guess iPod video type things. Does that allay your fears?

MAREE MCCASKILL: Not at all because you have the emergence of e-books, which can be delivered via mobile phone. You have downloads that can be done down on from the internet of e-books. So you have exactly the same thing.

SABRA LANE: Ms McCaskill believes the consequences are probably unintended.

She admits she hasn't seen the draft bill, but she says she has reliable information and that the proposed bill is wrong.

MAREE MCCASKILL: From a public point of view, public perception, it starts meaning that their content and what they can read, or view, starts being heavily classified. And I'm not sure the average Australian particularly wants that.

SABRA LANE: Chris Althaus, the Chief Executive of the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association has seen the draft bill. He's been consulted about it and he's still hoping to persuade the Minister to make further changes.

CHRIS ALTHAUS: We share concerns that the bill will place a very significant burden, particularly cost and administrative burden, on industry. It could be a red-tape nightmare. We are looking very closely at what the Government has said and we've proposed solutions that will be workable for industry.

SABRA LANE: How much could it cost you?

CHRIS ALTHAUS: Carriers will be very shortly carrying millions of pieces of content. Now if every one of those pieces of content needed to be separately scrutinised and assessed, there would be a very, very substantial cost burden on industry to do that.

SABRA LANE: Mr Althaus understands the Communications Minister's intention, and hopes to convince her to incorporate the Association's own self-regulatory code of conduct into the bill.

Communications Minister Helen Coonan.

HELEN COONAN: This is not about making something that is not currently legal illegal and it's a commonsense approach to regulating content that's delivered over increasingly sophisticated devices or technology.

SABRA LANE: The Minister says the Publishers Association hasn't contacted her about its concerns but that her door is open.

HELEN COONAN: We are a consultative office and we remain a consultative office right up until the time in which bills are introduced and debated.

This is all about ensuring that as new technology emerges, the kind of offensive content that worries parents, content that we think should be regulated in the same way that you regulate a broadcast of television, or something that goes over the internet.

Why should a child be exposed to something simply because they can access a 3G mobile?

***

The draft legislation that has content providers in a tizz. Crikey.com.au 06.03.07

Crikey has obtained a leaked copy of the Government’s draft legislation to censor media content online, using the film classification system.

***

Here is a brief description of the bill.

LEGISLATION PROPOSED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2007 AUTUMN SITTINGS 

Bills marked * are proposed for introduction and passage in the Autumn sittings

COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND THE ARTS

Communications Legislation Amendment (Content Services) Bill * 
- reform the regulatory structures for non-broadcasting communications content to ensure that existing policy principles for the regulation of content are consistently applied to these new audio-visual services

***

Helen Coonan also mentioned it during Senate Estimates in February. The main speaker below is the ALP's Dana Wortley, Senator for South Australia. 

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 
Proof Committee Hansard 
SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND THE ARTS
ESTIMATES (Additional Budget Estimates) 
MONDAY, 12 FEBRUARY 2007 
CANBERRA

Senator WORTLEY—This question is to the minister and to the department. I wonder whether you are aware that thousands of Australian children, some as young as six, are in possession of popular hand-held game systems with embedded software, activated on a wireless device, which in effect serves as a type of mobile chat room, although with a limited range of between 30 to 35 metres and that, in many instances, parents are not aware that the program exists on the particular hand-held game and you do not have to purchase an additional program. It exists already on it. It operates in real time, enabling children to send typed and picture messages, that, if opened, allows up to 16 users in one of four chat rooms to send and receive written messages and pictures. 

Ms O’Loughlin—I am not personally aware of the product that you are talking about. Regarding the classification elements around games, that is a matter for the Classification Board. If there is a product that is enabling chat rooms, I would like to get a little more detail of what the circumstance of that is. ACMA has in place a determination around mobile content and the industry itself also has a mobile premium services industry scheme in place, which may go to some of the issues that you have raised. I would probably need further detail on the product. 

Senator WORTLEY—It would be simpler to take on board if I gave you an explanation of an incident that occurred on Saturday night in Adelaide at a public venue where children were playing these games when they were chatting and someone else came in on their chat room. They are the typical hand-held computer games that kids today play. The concern that was raised by the constituent was that although—and I have looked into this myself—the wireless range is only between 30 and 35 metres, the other person who comes into the chat room can view the children where they are, and there are a number of chat rooms available on these devices. You can apparently have up to 16 on them. It is a safety issue and I was wondering whether or not the department has done anything to ensure the protection of children using these games, particularly in public places. There would be no problem with them using them in the privacy of their own homes or where they are under the supervision of adults, but there are potential dangers when they are using them in public places where there are a lot of people around. 

Ms Wright—As Ms O’Loughlin said, while we are not aware of that specific incident we have contemplated the issue of chat rooms and child safety. Under the service provider determination Ms O’Loughlin referred to, one of the obligations there is for providers of chat rooms to do an assessment of risks and to match the risks with appropriate safeguards. If this fails, that would be a matter that ACMA could  investigate. But the types of support we have given industry and chat room providers in those circumstances is that, if that material were to be classified and it was to be classified MA or above, it should be behind a restricted access system. For those chat rooms there should not be admittance for those under 18. Where there could be greyer areas and the provider had not contemplated material would be so strong, they need to have in place, if there is that type of risk, one of the strategies to match that risk, for example, electronic filtering or human monitoring and intervention. Our service provider determination does provide a mechanism to deal with that situation. 

Senator WORTLEY—Can I just give some further explanation of that. We are talking about a hand-held game that children use that has no connection. There are no cords; there is no connection with it. It is a wireless device that enables someone to come in on a text style chat room if they are within the vicinity of 30 to 35 metres and have that hand-held game themselves. The concern that was raised by the constituent was that messages sent could lure the child away to another area where there was not parental supervision or if the child was, in fact, in a public place—a sporting venue or something—where someone could see the child on the game and easily send a message to meet them wherever and children being children might— 

Senator Coonan—Perhaps I can give you some information that will get somewhere along the line of these ever emerging devices. I am not quite sure whether I am addressing the particular device you are talking about. The general comment I would make is that, as you would appreciate, existing content regulation in Australia has been traditionally specific to the platform over which it is conveyed, for example, television or the internet or phones. The reason why we have had to have a rethink about this is of course because of convergence with new capabilities of mobile devices to receive and display pictures and audiovisual content. Some of the platforms and the regulatory distinctions are being broken down by this convergence. The challenge for government, and for all of us, I suppose more broadly as a community, is how we get a framework that is sensible with how you get content today and how it is likely to be accessed in the future, given that in two weeks time there could be something new. We will be putting in place new safeguards to protect consumers from this sort of material on emerging content services. At the moment what it is addressed to is 3G mobiles and subscription based internet portals where something is not stored but goes into the ether. These new regulations will deal with this kind of content delivered to convergent devices. There is a bill that is currently being developed and is with industry for discussion. It is called the Communications Legislation Amendment (Content Services) Bill. It will be introduced very shortly and will provide for content safeguards comparable to those in place for traditional media platforms. It will extend the current safeguards that apply to content delivered over the net or television to be applied to content delivered over convergent devices. It will also include the prohibition of content rated X18-plus and above, as well as, with subscription services, the requirements for age restrictions on access to content suited only to adults. The usual sanctions will attach to it for non-compliance, including criminal penalties. That is very close. As you can appreciate, it has been quite a difficult exercise to work with industry to get all of that properly working and bedded down, but we are almost ready to go on it. I only hope that once introduced there is not something new that no-one could possibly have even thought of now. I hope it will deal with the device you have spoken about. 

Senator WORTLEY—I am not sure that it does. The games I am talking about are the typical games that kids are holding in their hands. 

Senator Coonan—Well, if it is a game, that is an Attorney-General matter.

Senator CONROY—It was not the content of the message that came in. The message basically came in and said, ‘Come and meet me at X place.’ So it is not the content of the game or that an offensive image or message was sent. A predator basically was able to see these kids playing on their Nintendo or whatever it was and say, ‘Hey, come and meet me.’ This is at a crowded public event. 

Ms O’Loughlin—The scenario is of considerable concern. 

Senator CONROY—Yes. 

Ms O’Loughlin—I think there are some elements under our safety mission notice that we have already released. If it was possible for somebody to contact us to provide us with the information then we would certainly look at it very seriously. 

Senator WORTLEY—I will do that this afternoon. 

Mr Cheah—There are some normal criminal laws that exist as well. If people are engaging in predatory behaviour, they could also talk to the police directly and complain. In some sense what you are describing is just like somebody ringing up and making a phone call. There is a limit to what the telecommunications carriers can do to stop that. 

Senator WORTLEY—I am fully aware of that. The concern raised is that it is embedded in the game. Many parents—and since then I have spoken to a number of parents—are not aware that their children are actually able to use this game to chat to other people only 30 to 35 metres away. They are actually able to send them text messages as well. 

Senator Coonan—You can do that on your phone. 

Senator WORTLEY—Well, you could, except we are talking about children as young as six. Senator Coonan—You can still do it on your phone. That is the thing. I am always willing to look at anything that may not have been covered but— 

Senator WORTLEY—Senator, you can do it on your phone. You are right. 

Senator Coonan—Yes. 

Senator WORTLEY—But this is without a number. All they have to do is see someone playing on it within 30 to 35 metres away, and they can turn theirs on and then send a message. That was the concern.

Updates January - February 2007